duality

SRUTI (THE UPANISHADS) DENY THE EXISTENCE OF EVEN A TRACE OF MULTIPLICITY | Aparokshanubhuti | Swami Chinmayananda

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment



Swami Chinmayananda writes the following:

The Śrutis have emphatically denied that the pluralistic world of minerals, mountains, trees, animals and human beings together constituting the world of multiplicity* exist even as a trace in the pure Reality.

The great seers, saints and sages have corroborated this with their personal experience. When there is no duality as the devotee and the Lord, how can the devotee say he is experiencing God?

When the dream merges [Tom: ie. dissolves and disappears] itself in the waking, how can the waker say that the dreamer is different from the waker?

So too when you transcend this place of Consciousness and wake up to the plane of God-consciousness, how can you experience duality or multiplicity? This is what all Śrutis declare.

~ Swami Chinmayananda, commentary on Aparoksanubhuti (a text by Shankara), verse 47


*Swamiji defines plurality and multiplicity as being the world of objects, such as minerals mountains trees animals and human beings. He states that not even a trace of these exist in the reality. He is following the definition of multiplicity given by the Upanishads and by Shankara when he writes this, both of whom are unequivocal that this world of multiplicity and plurality refers to the appearance of objects such as mountains trees etc, and these only appear to exist due to ignorance, and cease to appear to exist once ignorance has been removed.

When Swamiji explains that ‘not a trace’ of multiplicity exists in the reality, meaning in self-realization, when only reality is there, nothing else, no ignorance, he is also copying the language of Shankara and the Upanishads who also say ‘not a trace’ of multiplicity exists in self-realisation.

‘It is wrong to call Self the Witness’ – Sri Ramana Maharshi

~ Tom Das ~ 7 Comments

The following is an excerpt from this post: Is the Self a witness? Or is it everything? Or both?

Sri Ramana Maharshi has taught us in Guru Vachaka Kovai verse 98 (Guru Vachaka Kovai is the most authoritative record of Sri Ramana Maharshi’s verbal teachings according to Sri Ramana Ashram):

98. Unless the body is taken to be ‘I’, otherness – the world of moving and unmoving objects – cannot be seen. Hence, because otherness – the creatures and their Creator – does not exist, it is wrong to call Self the Witness.

Sri Sadhu Om, a direct devotee of Sri Ramana Maharshi, writes in his commentary on this verse:

Descriptions of self as the ‘witness of the individual soul’ (jiva sakshi) or the ‘witness of everything’ (sarva sakshi), which can be found in some sacred texts, are not true but are only figurative (upacara), because only when other things are known would the one who knows them be a ‘witness’ of them. Since self does not know anything in the state of absolute oneness, which is devoid of any other thing, to what can it be a witness? Therefore describing self as a ‘witness’ is incorrect.

What both Sri Ramana Maharshi and Sri Sadhu Om are saying is that objects only appear when the ego/ignorance is present. In Self-realisation, there are no objects, only the Self, so in truth the Self cannot be said to be a witness.

In verse 869 of Guru Vachaka Kovai Sri Ramana teaches us:

869. ’Tis a foolish fancy to ascribe the role of ‘witness’ to the Self, the luminous Sun, the mighty sky of Pure Awareness. In the Self Immutable there is no room for maya’s darkness void. The Self is one sole whole without a second.

Here is an alternative translation of the same verse, with Sri Sadhu Om’s commentary, which essentially states in truth, ie. in realisation, there is no Maya in the Self. It is only for ajnani’s, ie. the ignorant, that consider the Self to be a witness of phenomena/maya:

869. The role [dharma] of seeing is ascribed to Self – the space of consciousness, the sun – only in the imagination of ajnanis, [because] maya, the empty ignorance [of seeing otherness], never exists in Self, the support [sthanu], [and also because] Self is without a second.

Sri Sadhu Om’s comments: Since Self is in truth that which transcends all roles and all qualities, and since It exists as one without a second, to glorify It as the ‘witness of all’ [sarva-sakshi] or as the ‘knower of all’ [sarvajna] is merely the folly of ignorant people.

Also see: The practice of witnessing thoughts and events was never even in the least recommended by Sri Ramana Maharshi

There is no Duality in Non-duality | Self-knowledge

~ Tom Das ~ 1 Comment

[Sri Ramana Maharshi writes in] Upadesa Undiyar verse 26, “Being Self is itself knowing Self, because Self is that which is devoid of duality…“.

Therefore it follows that the very nature of Self is itself knowledge, though it is a knowledge which is devoid of the act of knowing.

That is why Sri Bhagavan says in verse 12 of Ulladu Narpadu, “ … That which knows cannot be [true] knowledge … “.

The same truth is also expressed by Sri Muruganar in verse 831 of Mey Tava Vilakkam, where he says, “The real ‘I’ is such a knowledge which knows neither other things nor itself”.

Since Self-knowledge is non-dual, it is a knowledge which shines without the triad [triputi] – the knower, the act of knowing and the object known – and hence it is quite different from other kinds of knowledge, all of which involve the act of knowing.

~ Sri Sadhu Om, commentary on Guru Vachaka Kovai verse 1038

Multiplicity, plurality and polarity ARE duality | Non-duality | Sri Ramana Maharshi

~ Tom Das ~ 18 Comments

Seeing multiplicity/plurality and seeing the underlying oneness within the plurality or multiplicity is not the real non-duality at all.

This false notion of non-duality, which is very commonplace, is actually an ego-preservation strategy where the notion of the ‘false-I’ is subtly continued, and suffering still continues in this state – seeking still continues too, as does a subtle sense of individuality.

Non-duality is that in which there is no duality/multiplicity/plurality/individuality whatsoever. Only then will seeking end. Only then will suffering end. Until this is discovered, seeking will continue, and with it the suffering and sense of individuality (ie. duality) will too. To discover the true non-duality one must turn within and discover the Self for oneself, which is indivisible Oneness-Love-Being-Bliss.

At least this is my experience.

This is why Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi states in Guru Vachaka Kovai verse 931:

  1. “The mukta [liberated sage] like the rest of us perceives
    The world in all its vast variety
    And yet he sees non-difference in it”,
    So people say. This is not true.

Sri Sadhu Om comments upon the above verse as follows:
‘People have many wrong conceptions about the state of a Jnani or Jivanmukta, and one such misconception is refuted here. “What people see as water, the Jivanmukta also sees as water, and what they see as food, He also sees as food. Therefore, in His experience of sense-objects, the Jivanmukta is the same as other people. But even while the Jivanmukta thus sees these differences, He sees the non-difference in them” – are there not many pandits and lecturers who talk and write thus, even though they themselves have no experience of Advaita but have only read about it in books? But who is the proper authority to say what is the actual experience of a Jivanmukta? Only a real Jivanmukta! Thus Bhagavan Sri Ramana, who has actually experienced the reality and who is the true Loka Maha Guru, declares in this verse that such statements are wrong, and in the next verse He explains how and why they are wrong.’

In his commentary to the next verse Sri Sadhu Om continues, relating to us his own direct hearing of Sri Ramana’s teaching:
‘…Regarding this erroneous theory of bheda-abheda or unity in diversity, Sri Bhagavan used to say that if the least difference or diversity is perceived, it means that the ego or individuality is there, so if difference is experienced, non-difference or unity would merely be a theoretical proposition and not an actual experience.’

Q. Isn’t it the ego that wants to turn within or end the ego? | Why we need to turn within | Advaita Paradox

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment

Q. Isn’t it the ego that wants to turn within or end the ego?

Tom: yes, it is only the ego, also known as thought or mind, that requires a teaching or needs to turn within.

Because the ego-I is an unreal illusion and doesn’t really exist, when it turns within towards the Subject or I AM, the ego and all multiplicity/duality disappear and the (true) Self is revealed as Self by the Self.

Through (the ego) turning within, the Reality that is Eternal Timeless Thoughtless Bliss-Love is revealed. This Reality is what you are, what you have always been, and is beyond words, but the above words (…thoughtless bliss…) are just used as indicators.

Without turning within, it is merely the ego proclaiming ‘there is no ego’ or ‘all is already perfect’ or something similar, and the teaching remains on the superficial levels of concepts and words only, and the illusion of suffering and duality continue.

As long as ego-mind-thoughts persist, there is need for effort or spiritual practice (sadhana), for ego-mind-thought is duality, ego-mind-thought is suffering.

As long as separation or multiplicity is perceived in any way shape or form, there is need for effort or sadhana.

As long as identification with body-mind continues (and therefore desire, fear and suffering continue), there is need for effort or sadhana.

However the Self itself is beyond any such efforts!

Oh, the paradox! However, turn within towards your Self, towards I AM, towards the Subject, and all these paradoxes will be resolved and dissolved in the Reality-That-Is.

❤️

Also see:

Q. Why turn within? Nonduality as I have experienced it is the actual disappearance of what is considered within and without, one seamless blending

Q. Doesn’t the notion of ‘turning within’ to find yourself create an artificial duality? All is already one! | Self-Enquiry | Atma Vichara

HOW TO END EGO-SUFFERING (and why other spiritual paths tend not to ultimately work)

Q. Doesn’t the notion of ‘turning within’ to find yourself create an artificial duality? All is already one! | Self-Enquiry | Atma Vichara

~ Tom Das ~ 2 Comments

funny face perfect person

Q. Don’t these traditional Vedanta teachings create an artificial duality where there actually is none? Why turn away from the world towards an apparent ‘True Self’? Why create this duality in the first place? All is already one!

Tom: For most, the ego-mind keeps on habitually coming back, causing suffering and perpetuating the illusion of duality until one finally turns to Self-Enquiry and Abides as the Self. You can say ‘all is one’, or ‘this is it already’, or ‘there is no duality’, but usually it is just the ego-mind saying that (ie. it is only on the level of concepts and belief) and so suffering and the illusion of duality continue. The infinite-love-bliss of the Self is not ‘experienced’ or ‘known’.

How to remove the illusion of separation, so it, and the resultant suffering never returns? The only way I know is to abide as the pure consciousness within. This is the teaching of the Vedanta scriptures and of all effective and true spiritual teachings that I have come across.

For most, unless this is done, suffering and peace alternate, which is itself suffering.

The purpose of Satsang/teachers/teachings is only for you to turn within and Be what You already Are. Other than that, no teacher or teaching is required.

‘The seat of Realisation is within and the seeker cannot find it as an object outside him. That seat is bliss and is the core of all beings. Hence it is called the Heart. The only useful purpose of the present birth is to turn within and realise it. There is nothing else to do.’

Sri Ramana Maharshi, Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, Talk no. 219